From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@ti.com>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
mkl@pengutronix.de, davem@davemloft.net
Cc: linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 18:48:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fafe78cbb34dc8acd31f873bcd55af879311d839.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc3d0c0c-f56f-0bb5-e90b-a09cdf761f3c@ti.com>
On Mon, 2019-03-04 at 13:12 -0600, Dan Murphy wrote:
> On 3/4/19 12:13 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> > Am 04.03.19 um 18:22 schrieb Dan Murphy:
> > > > > + int pm_clock_support;
> > > >
> > > > A "bool" would be more appropriate, I think.
> > >
> > > I was abiding by this checkpatch warning I got on the is_peripherial.
> > >
> > > CHECK: Avoid using bool structure members because of possible alignment issues - see: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384
> > > #94: FILE: drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.h:94:
> > > + bool is_peripherial;
> > >
> >
> > Ah, right! I was also surprised to get that warning. The kernel is full
> > of bool's, but well, we should make "checkpatch" happy (and Linus).
That check has been removed from checkpatch by
commit 7967656ffbfa493f5546c0f18bf8a28f702c4baa
Author: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Date: Fri Jan 18 15:50:47 2019 -0700
coding-style: Clarify the expectations around bool
There has been some confusion since checkpatch started warning about bool
use in structures, and people have been avoiding using it.
Many people feel there is still a legitimate place for bool in structures,
so provide some guidance on bool usage derived from the entire thread that
spawned the checkpatch warning.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+55aFwVZk1OfB9T2v014PTAKFhtVan_Zj2dOjnCy3x6E4UJfA@mail.gmail.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-05 2:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-01 18:50 [PATCH v6 1/4] can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework Dan Murphy
2019-03-01 18:50 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] can: m_can: Rename m_can_priv to m_can_classdev Dan Murphy
2019-03-04 17:31 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2019-03-04 18:14 ` Dan Murphy
2019-03-04 18:26 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2019-03-01 18:50 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] dt-bindings: can: tcan4x5x: Add DT bindings for TCAN4x5X driver Dan Murphy
2019-03-01 18:50 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] can: tcan4x5x: Add tcan4x5x driver to the kernel Dan Murphy
2019-03-04 18:29 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2019-03-04 19:07 ` Dan Murphy
2019-03-04 19:33 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2019-03-04 16:56 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework Wolfgang Grandegger
2019-03-04 17:22 ` Dan Murphy
2019-03-04 18:13 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2019-03-04 19:12 ` Dan Murphy
2019-03-05 2:48 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2019-03-04 19:43 ` Dan Murphy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=fafe78cbb34dc8acd31f873bcd55af879311d839.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dmurphy@ti.com \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wg@grandegger.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).